First Blu-Ray movies announced

By Ellie Gibson Published 4 January, 2006

What you'll be watching on PS3.

There's still no word on how long we'll have to wait for the PS3 to arrive, but at least we'll have something to watch when it does - Sony has announced that the first batch of Blu-Ray movie titles will be out this spring.

As you can see from the list below, the line-up will include high-octane adventure titles such as xXx, SWAT and Robocop, along with tired old nancy like Sense and Sensibility and Legends of the Fall. Later in the year you can look forward to Black Hawk Down and Bridge on the River Kwai, which will come on 50GB dual-layer discs.

Sony is aiming to release four Blu-Ray titles per month to start off with - a figure that will rise to 10 per month by the start of 2007. And it don't just expect movies, either, since hit TV series will be making the transition too (please Uncle Sony oh please we've nearly worn out our Babylon 5 DVDs).

If you can't wait for the PS3 to turn up, you can always buy a Blu-Ray disc drive separately - loads of 'em are going on show at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this week, and they're set to go on sale in Japan shortly.

But if you're not ready to invest in The Future yet, don't panic - Sony will continue to release movies on DVD as well as Blu-Ray, for a good while at least. In fact, blockbusters such as Underworld Evolution, which is out later this year, will get a simultaneous release on both formats.

Like DVDs, Blu-Ray discs will be region-encoded - but there's a twist. There will only be three regions this time round: Region 1 (the Americas and East Asia, excluding China but including Japan), Region 2 (Europe and Africa) and Region 3 (Russia, China and Others). Which means Japanese and American PS3 owners will be able to import movies from each others' countries with wild abandon, while we're a bit stuck.

Anyway, here's the list of Blu-Ray movies announced so far:

  • The Fifth Element
  • Bram Stoker's Dracula
  • Desperado
  • For a Few Dollars More
  • The Guns of Navarone
  • Hitch
  • House of Flying Daggers
  • A Knight's Tale
  • Kung Fu Hustle
  • The Last Waltz
  • Legends of the Fall
  • Resident Evil Apocalypse
  • Robocop
  • Sense and Sensibility
  • Stealth
  • Species
  • SWAT
  • xXx
Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (91) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • tonynibbles #1 6 years ago

    Oh!

    The Fifth Element, House of Flying Daggers and Desperado should be purchases for me.
    Mmmm... true hi-definition movies at last with decent sound!

    DVD is soooooo shite.

  • theweaze #2 6 years ago

    hmm yet to be convinced by blu-ray and hd-dvd, i cant see your average joe wanting to spend 400 quid on a fancy new box and new discs to play films he already owns.

  • Xerx3s #3 6 years ago

    Great, so they are promoting it by using ancient films, some of them where not even worth watching the first time. All here who have BR players raise your hand.

  • smelly #4 6 years ago

    I still think that Hi-def is the emperors clothing.

    I was in curry's over christmas, they had 2 hi-def sets displaying hi-def film demos to show off the technology. I'm still buggered if i can REALLY see the difference when it's all moving, etc.

    Sure, when you pause it, or on a static screen. It's REALLY noticable. But when it's moving (which is what you expect a film to do) - couldnt tell.

    And those that claim they can tell are probably the same people who claim they can tell the difference between 50 & 60 hz.

    I can UNDERSTAND in america them wanting to go hi-def, as their picture qaulity is pants. But over here, im not convinced in the slightest.

  • captbirdseye #5 6 years ago

    still doubt that the public will shine to blu-ray having spent all these years getting there dvd collection together. Did some work in uni on this most people didnt have a clue what blu-ray was and were shocked to find that they will have to start there collections all over again plus blu-ray is also a way in which sony can effectively own the future of home entertainment because by in large looking at hddvd the support compared to blu-ray is terrible

  • Dizzy #6 6 years ago

    Oooohh exciting!!!!!


    NOT!


    Now you can own the DVD, UMD and Bluray version of Sipderman!!!

  • captbirdseye #7 6 years ago

    thats why i put my movies on a memory stick :D

  • SeesThroughAll #8 6 years ago

    "Will Blu-Ray players play DVDs too?"

    The option is quite possible for BR reader makers, but at the expense of dual laser read heads. It's the same for HD-DVD, though, really.

  • captbirdseye #9 6 years ago

    bring back these bad boys http://w ww.zaldiva.com/store/product986.html

  • PearOfAnguish #10 6 years ago

    i'm more than happy with the quality DVD offers.

    So are most of us. This new generation of media seems increasingly irrelevant. How long did we get along with video tapes for? 15, 20 years? DVDs started to get popular in 99/00 and now 5 years later we've got a new format on the way that'll require new hardware. The jump from DVD to blu-ray/HD is far less significant than that of VHS to DVD. We've already got special features and menus, I fail to see what the new discs can offer that DVD doesn't have already, aside from HD (which requires a new TV that the majority of us don't own.)
    And then there's the HD-DVD/blu-ray situation...
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 13:02

  • Kostabi #11 6 years ago

    Considering most of Europe is without a high definition TV service and will be for years it seems like a giant waste of time trying to push Blu-ray or HD-DVD to people who largely aren't going to care. If anything most people are going to look at their giant shelf of DVDs and be royally pissed off.

  • tengu #12 6 years ago

    "Now you can own the DVD, UMD and Bluray version of Sipderman!!!"

    Wow, is that anything like Spiderman perchance?

    Couldn't give a toss about BluRay movies, just games. Hopefully we'll be seeing some of those announced before long.

  • captbirdseye #13 6 years ago

    the future of hddvd or blu ray movies will depend on the support of the porn industry if they they embrace it we will have to but if they dont we wont they were ones that decided the fate of dvd

  • Royal Fool #14 6 years ago

    What a shitty lineup. It's either terrible recent films that nobody wants to watch, or oldies that won't make that much of a difference on this new format thanks to the old technology. I can't waith to watch "The Guns of Navarone" in high-definition glory! WOW!

    And if we learned anything from the launch of DVD players... these first movie releases will have crappy transfers and quality.

  • alpha-0ne #15 6 years ago

    blue ray and hd-dvd are coming too early for movies, people are still discovering dvd

    and the majority of HDTV's sold upto 8 months ago are not compatible and will display the movies in 480p

    A tv that is 'HDREADY' ie has an HDMI or DVI (with HDCP encryption) is required to view these movies in high def
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 13:15

  • WickedDeeJ #16 6 years ago

    So, you're basically saying that we should just tell Sony Europe to piss off and buy our PS3 in America or Japan, is that it? Well big surprise, and what I was gonna do anyway, heh.

  • Darren #17 6 years ago

    Oooo what an exciting lineup of movies... not!

    And seeing as the first HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players will cost around $1,000 (~£600) what's the betting that the movies themselves cost upwards of £30 or more?

    I agree with PearOfAnguish that hi-def movies have arrived too soon and that the leap from hi-def DVD over standard ones isn't as pronounced as the leap from VHS to DVD since we can already watch a digital picture with digital audio. Better to just buy an upscaling DVD player like I have and continue to watch DVDs in 720p or 1080i until you can be sure which of the two new formats has a long-term future.

    At the moment I'm in no rush to buy Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movies as I'm delighted with current DVDs via HDMI on my Samsung DVD player. I really don't think that Sony will have the same success with Blu-Ray on the PS3 as they did DVD on the PS2, mainly because in order to watch Blu-Ray movies you MUST own an expensive HDTV otherwise there'd be no point in buying the expensive movies.

  • CrumpledPaper #18 6 years ago

    Paramount, 20th Century Fox and Lionsgate have also announced titles!

    Paramount (first ten are launch titles):

    Four Brothers
    Sahara
    Aeon Flux
    Sky Captain & the World of Tomorrow
    The Italian Job
    Tomb Raider
    U2: Rattle and Hum
    Sleepy Hollow
    We Were Soldiers
    Manchurian Candidate
    Mission Impossible
    Mission Impossible 2
    Mission Impossible 3

    h ttp://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndm ViewId=news_view&newsId=20060104005375&newsLang=en

    20th Century Fox (20 "first wave" titles):
    Fantastic Four
    The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
    Behind Enemy Lines
    Kiss Of The Dragon
    Ice Age
    + 15 more

    http://www.ccnmatthews.com/news/releasesfr/show.jsp?act ion=showRelease&searchText=false&showText=all&actionFor=5740 32

    Lionsgate (their first 10 titles):

    Lord of War
    The Punisher
    The Devil's Rejects
    Saw
    Terminator 2: Judgment Day
    Reservoir Dogs
    Total Recall
    Dune
    Rambo: First Blood
    See No Evil

    http://www.pr newswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01 -04-2006/0004242114&EDATE=

    So that's 60 titles announced sofar - with Disney, Warner, New Line etc. still to announce!

    For those sceptical of how big a difference it is - I think you should wait to see it with your own eyes rather than speculating. Initial reports from tradeshows past, where Blu-ray was demoed with 720p material, were full of open-jawed praise. And these movies are coming at 1080p - twice the resolution of 720p still! On a HDTV the difference will be huge, no doubt about it.
    Edited by 2 at 04/01/06 @ 13:31

  • CrumpledPaper #19 6 years ago

    Yeah, the original masters for movies recorded on film are not a limiting factor here at all. There is no concept of discrete resolution with those movies, it's a continuous signal. Masters are the ultimate quality, for a particular movie you won't ever get better. DVD and Blu-ray take digital transfers of these movies. Blu-ray, with nearly 7 times the resolution will get a lot closer to master quality than DVD (and indeed, I can already see some of the studios touting it as offering "master quality";).

  • valli #20 6 years ago

    And it don't just expect movies, either, since hit TV series will be making the transition too (please Uncle Sony oh please we've nearly worn out our Babylon 5 DVDs).

    I doubt B5 was produced on anything higher than standard definition. At least you could get a whole season on a single disc I suppose.

  • tengu #21 6 years ago

    But at the end of the day, you'd still be watching Babylon 5 :(

  • valli #22 6 years ago

    What format do the studios keep the movies in?

    Presumably they're butchered something awful to fit them onto a regular DVD.

    Until a few years back, they kept copies of the original negatives somewhere safe and had standard def digital masters for broadcast, DVD, Laserdisc, and everything else.

    I think Ridley Scott talks about Fox doing new digital transfers at 4K (4000 px wide) on the newest Alien DVD. 2K masters is enough for the highest format today, 4K masters are even future compatible once XHDTV comes out in ten years. :)

  • Feanor #23 6 years ago

    "Like DVDs, Blu-Ray discs will be region-encoded - but there's a twist. There will only be three regions this time round: Region 1 (the Americas and East Asia, excluding China but including Japan), Region 2 (Europe and Africa) and Region 3 (Russia, China and Others)"

    So Australia and NZ are in Region 3?

  • Vin #24 6 years ago

    Fuck off Sony - always imposing new formats on us like that bloody UMD fiasco.

  • tonynibbles #25 6 years ago

    I saw a demo recently in a store and was amazed by the quality.

    It was on a 42" LCD screen, which helps.
    But many stores just dont have the hardware to showcase it properly.

  • SeesThroughAll #26 6 years ago

    "Fuck off Sony - always imposing new formats on us..."

    If you think Sony are the only company that does that, think again.

  • Artemus #27 6 years ago

    There's no way I'm 'upgrading' my DVD collection this soon. I dread to think how much it would cost. As long as the player is backwards compatible, i'll stick with DVD thanks.

  • ChocNut #28 6 years ago

    So - if you're serious about gaming and you're European - screw Sony Europe and import from America or Japan is the message here once again?

  • kenty #29 6 years ago

    "And those that claim they can tell are probably the same people who claim they can tell the difference between 50 & 60 hz."

    If there was no actual difference between 50 and 60hz then so many people wouldn't complain about it. I for one can immediately tell if a game is locked to framerate and running at 50 and for me it significantly detracts from the gaming experience on most titles. I've even tested it, we had the same game running side by side on 2 consoles, in this case was a PS2 RPG. We put the player character in the same area and then had him run in a straight line from one end of the area to the other at exactly the same time. On the Ps2 that was running at 50hz, it took a full 5 seconds longer to get to the other side of the area than it did on the same game in exact same conditions running at 60hz.

    To say that there is no noticeable difference between normal and Hi-Def video is just as laughable, why don't you load up a PC game, set it to 640x480, play for a bit, then run it at 1280x720 (some PC games support this res, PoP Two thrones for example) and then tell me if it doesn't look any better....


    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 14:12

  • rinoaMW #30 6 years ago

    apart from being used as the ps3 game format (which i have no-objection to) - will blu-ray dvds be what betamax was to VHS i wonder?

    it does seem like the DVD format has been given a short shelf life (even tho im being purely speculative atm), and as other posters here have already started, will the general public be ready for a new media system?

    i for one, doubt it, and i can't afford to keep updating my film collections every 5 years either :)

  • jienn #31 6 years ago

    I have a 1080p monitor, and 1080p clips are available for download. If you have a good full HD screen or projector, crt, lcd, plasma or anything else it will be worth it. But for most a good DVD upscaling chip will do.

    The interesting thing would be to combine blu-ray and good dvd upscaling chip in the same player. That way you can enjoy your DVDs in the best possible way, and also have next generation 1080p option for all the new blu-ray (or HD-DVD) movies you get.

    I will probably only buy blu-ray versions of the top 5 movies i already own, and it would depend how much better the transfer is, and how much extra they fill the discs with.

  • davyuk #32 6 years ago

    What... no Matrix?

  • Frogger #33 6 years ago

    +1 PearOf Anguish

    This new generation of media comes way too fast. The difference in pricing will be huge and the visible quality difference almost unoticeable. Maybe Microsoft was smart this time by sticking to the simple and costless DVD format for 5 more years.

    It makes me think of the CD Audio. Nobody cares in buying a SACD equipment (except a few hi-fi geeks) because people already have 300 CDs at home and won't notice any difference in sound quality on their 200€ stereo.

  • RobTheBuilder #34 6 years ago

    Who fucking cares?

    No one with any sense will buy a BluRay until there are plenty of titles, otherwise whats the point?!

  • Dizzy #35 6 years ago

    "Boss we have *no* PS3 info to share at CES"
    "Whaaaat? Why not?"
    "Well *cough* because we don't actually have a machine yet"
    "But... we are launching in 3 months!"
    "Err..."
    "Announce some Bluray movies instead!"
    "YES boss!! Great idea!"
    Edited by 2 at 04/01/06 @ 14:28

  • mrbandersnatch #36 6 years ago

    So what are these going to be? 720p? 1080i? And how many of these are going just be upscaled versions?

    *hughhh spit* And given most of these of these were probably filmed at 24fps, even at 1080p WHY THE F*** DO WE NEED A NEW DISK FORMAT? Most HD TS's will fit on a DVD (9) even, using H.264 Id expect a lot of films to fit on a standard DVD (yes even at 1080p).

    Seriously, Why TF do we need Blu-Ray? A video player with upgradable codec support would see to make more sense...oh wait a sec. Stupid me, I was looking at it from the perspective of the consumer. I should have remembered that the purpose of blu-ray is actually to get far more restictive DRM out there so that people wouldnt be able to do things like make backup copies or skip adverts.....

    Personally I think i'll wait till next year and see how HVD (800GB per disk with a promise of 3.6TB in 2009) does over the next few years...oh and stick with my freevo box.... :)

  • Kon #37 6 years ago

    "And those that claim they can tell are probably the same people who claim they can tell the difference between 50 & 60 hz"

    Maybe, but please don't tell me you can't do so. You needn't go any further than VF4:Evo. Play it for about half an hour on 60Hz then try out 50Hz. If nothing else, just about every combo you thought you knew won't work as it should.

  • jienn #38 6 years ago

    Ofcourse it's not too soon, it's about 20 years since the first HD crt came out! But the move from DVD > HD* will take a long time. And now there are just videophiles that will buy it (And PS3 users?). Its not just a new format IMHO, it's a next step tech-wise....but it wont explode. I for one will continue to buy dvds.

  • Darren #39 6 years ago

    I think Sony adopting Blu-Ray for the PS3 so soon could be a costly mistake.

    It strikes me that the target audience for the PlayStation brand and, thus, the PS3 aren't the sort of people who are particularly interested in hi-def movies anyway or more likely don't own or have no intention of buying an HDTV, they just want to play the latest Metal Gear Solid or Grand Theft Auto title. Maybe I'm stereotyping but doesn't it strike anyone else as odd that Sony are suddenly aiming their new machine, not at the casual-end of the market, but the elite end, the person that has money to spend on expensive HDTVs and Blu-Ray movies that are needed to make the most of the PS3?

    And surely any diehard movie collector isn't going to fork out for a games console when a dedicated Blu-Ray player will give better playback (remember how awful the PS2's DVD playback was? It didn't even support RGB for crying out loud!!!)?

    I reckon Blu-Ray/HD-DVD are being launched at least five years too early and Microsoft have made the right choice by not including HD-DVD in the 360. In five years time, if HD movies have taken off then they can include it in the Xbox 720 and we'll be better informed as to which format to invest in so as to avoid buying into one that goes that way of Betamax!

    I've seen 720p hi-def movie clips on my Xbox 360 and they do look great but they don't look amazingly superior to upscaled standard DVDs from normal viewing distances, just slightly better. Maybe from six inches away you can appreciate the differences in detail but personally I'm more than happy with upscaled DVD and it cost me just £90.

    Blu-Ray/HD-DVD, as far as I'm concerned, can wait...

  • CrumpledPaper #40 6 years ago

    "What... no Matrix?"

    Warner have not announced their titles yet. They will in the next day or so, though there's no guarantee the Matrix will be among the first.

    "The interesting thing would be to combine blu-ray and good dvd upscaling chip in the same player. That way you can enjoy your DVDs in the best possible way, and also have next generation 1080p option for all the new blu-ray (or HD-DVD) movies you get."

    This is one nice thing about Blu-ray as far as easing the transition from DVD to Blu-ray. I believe it's part of the Blu-ray specification that all Blu-ray players will also upconvert DVDs to high def. The argument is often put: "they expect me to buy all my movies again?!?" but that just doesn't make sense. It's not like VHS to DVD which were completely incompatible. Indeed, your DVDs will look better than ever on a Blu-ray player. So keep your DVDs, start buying Blu-ray (if its priced similarly), and selectively update your old movies if you wish.

    "and Blu-Ray movies that are needed to make the most of the PS3?"

    PS3 is primarily a games player. Blu-ray movies are one element of its offering.

    "And surely any diehard movie collector isn't going to fork out for a games console when a dedicated Blu-Ray player will give better playback (remember how awful the PS2's DVD playback was? It didn't even support RGB for crying out loud!!!)?"

    Many of the issues that gave rise to differences in quality in DVD playback between different players aren't really there with Blu-ray. They all support Digital-out etc. PS3's Blu-ray drive will be no different than any other early Blu-ray drive, except it won't record to discs.

    "I reckon Blu-Ray/HD-DVD are being launched at least five years too early and Microsoft have made the right choice by not including HD-DVD in the 360. In five years time, if HD movies have taken off then they can include it in the Xbox 720 and we'll be better informed as to which format to invest in so as to avoid buying into one that goes that way of Betamax!"

    You should feel very safe buying Bluray. The only major studio not to support it is Universal, and they're expected to announce support sooner rather than later. Blu-ray is the defacto HD movie standard now.

    "I've seen 720p hi-def movie clips on my Xbox 360 and they do look great but they don't look amazingly superior to upscaled standard DVDs from normal viewing distances, just slightly better."

    Compare them to regular DVD. Also, Blu-ray movies are 1080p, twice the resolution of 720p. I'd also wonder how those 720p clips from Live are encoded - I doubt they were encoding for quality, rather size (and thus speed of download). Technically the resolution jump from DVD to Blu-ray (7-8x) is nearly twice that which existed between VHS and DVD (4x).
    Edited by 2 at 04/01/06 @ 14:52

  • PearOfAnguish #41 6 years ago

    http://www. theinquirer.net/?article=28691

    Interesting little snippet there. They damn well better use the same size cases.
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 14:56

  • Frogger #42 6 years ago

    I own a Samsung HDTV (lucky me) and I tried to view some HD trailers on it from my PC. Sure it looks great, very detailed, as long as I stay close enough to the TV set.
    When I go back in my sofa, the difference is not so amazing. You can still say that it's HD, of course, it's better, but the difference is not as big as it was between VHS and DVD.

    Maybe the point is to get your sofa closer to the TV to really enjoy HD.


    PS : I've got an excellent view.

  • Frogger #43 6 years ago

    Hi CrumbledPaper,

    How are things going at Sony ?

  • CrumpledPaper #44 6 years ago

    "Maybe the point is to get your sofa closer to the TV to really enjoy HD. "

    Or..get a bigger screen. Part of the role of HD content is to facilitate the trend of larger and larger screens.

    I've a 90" projector screen at home, and trust me, no matter how far away I sit, you can see the difference between regular DVD and an upconverted DVD for example, not to mention native HD content. Regular DVD often looks pretty bad, actually..a larger screen certainly highlights its shortcomings.

    "How are things going at Sony ?"

    I'm sure they're just toasty.

    I'm a home theatre enthusiast. I've been waiting for HD movies for 2 years now. Forgive me if I'm excited :p
    Edited by 2 at 04/01/06 @ 15:01

  • Frogger #45 6 years ago

    Getting my sofa closer to the TV is less expansive than a bigger screen ! :-)

    Well, you're a home theater enthusiast and then I perfectly understand your point. Useless to say that the mass market isn't, and that's why I hardly see 10th of millions of people rushing on HDTVs and BR disc players next year.
    According to me, HD won't get mass market before another few years. And that might cost a lot to Sony on the PS3 side of things.

  • Fixxxer #46 6 years ago

    /Sets up PlayAfrica

  • CrumpledPaper #47 6 years ago

    "Well, you're a home theater enthusiast and then I perfectly understand your point. Useless to say that the mass market isn't, and that's why I hardly see 10th of millions of people rushing on HDTVs and BR disc players next year.
    According to me, HD won't get mass market before another few years. And that might cost a lot to Sony on the PS3 side of things."

    It'll be a trickle-down thing, and it will gain momentum over time. Obviously it'll take quite some time for it to become mainstream, but I actually prefer to think of it as an extension to DVD rather than a total replacement.

    For people with a HDTV (and half of the couple of million TVs sold in Britain last year are HD ready, and a much greater proportion going forward will be), and with a cheap player (e.g. PS3), it may well become of a case of "why not" rather than "why", if title pricing is reasonable. That may happen sooner than you might expect for those people.

    As for the cost to Sony - it's been nothing but good things for them sofar. Blu-ray in PS3 has almost single-handedly won Blu-ray the support of 2 major studios that previously were HD-DVD exclusive. The chance to get Blu-ray players (whatever about HDTVs) into tens of millions of homes, possibly a hundred million homes, in just a few years via PS3, isn't an opportunity they could really turn down IMO.
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 15:28

  • richardb #48 6 years ago

    Few more announced than that list now. Just found out about a bunch of more Blu-Ray releases, as well as Fox not abandoning the current DVD purchasers.

    http://www.themovieblog.com/archives/ 2006/01/bluray_releases_announced.html

  • Darren #49 6 years ago

    I couldn't agree with you more, Frogger.

    I really being really excited about DVD and I couldn't wait to upgrade from VHS. I'm a single man with a high-disposable income but Blu-Ray/HD-DVD just doesn't interest me at the moment as I find DVD playback more the adequate on my HDTV.

    Now I will buy hi-def movies eventually but I see that being four or five years away assuming that DVDs don't suddently go the way of VHS forcing us to buy the newer formats.

    The big issue with Blu-Ray/HD-DVD movies is that in order to watch them you MUST have an HDTV and that adds enormously to the cost unlike DVDs which you could play on any TV. How many people who buy the PS3 will be prepared to fork out over £1,000 to be able to watch Blu-Ray?

    In fact, if you believe Sony, you'd have to fork out over £5,000 for one of their TVs (obviously!) because only they offer true hi-def in the form of 1080p...

  • CrumpledPaper #50 6 years ago

    "The big issue with Blu-Ray/HD-DVD movies is that in order to watch them you MUST have an HDTV and that adds enormously to the cost unlike DVDs which you could play on any TV. How many people who buy the PS3 will be prepared to fork out over £1,000 to be able to watch Blu-Ray? "

    Not true. You can watch them on any TV you like, but obviously you'll only fully see the resolution benefit on a HD screen.
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 15:41

  • tonynibbles #51 6 years ago

    Can I just say thank you to Crumpled paper for posting just facts and correcting all the pointless posts. Good effort.

  • Frogger #52 6 years ago

    Tony, a point of view isn't necessarily "pointless" when it comes from consumers, who will choose to buy or not to buy at the end.

  • tonynibbles #53 6 years ago

    Always nice to know the facts though. 'Pointless' was perhaps harsh, but kind of aimed at the posts that don't have anything to say other than ranting anti anti anti everything all the time. It gets boring.

  • justMe #54 6 years ago

    "Maybe the point is to get your sofa closer to the TV to really enjoy HD. "

    That's exactly the point! People are getting excited about this whole HD stuff when most HD TV sets have pixel sizes similar (if not smaller) to most PC monitors. Since people watch tv at more than 10x the distance that they use their monitors, you won't notice the difference much...

    Just try looking at your monitor from the same distance you normally watch tv, you probably won't be able to read this text.

    And don't come to me with "TV screens are getting larger". I have a 42" plasma screen in my living room, and I really don't need a larger screen. I am more than happy with it's "low res" DVD picture quality, together with a good sound setup I already prefer watching movies at home than going to the theater. And until games get to the point when I cannot tell the difference from a movie, I don't need High Res console games either...

  • Darren #55 6 years ago

    CrumpledPaper - Surely Blu-Ray will only be a success if people are actually buying the movies on that format? Just because Sony can sell 20 million PS3s doesn't automatically mean that they'll have 20 million customers buying into their new movie format.

    In reality, probably only a small percentage will buy them because everyone else won't own HDTVs so it seems an awful waste to include it in a next-gen games console at this early stage when HDTV is still in it's infancy.

    The PS3 is not quite the same tempting step-up that the PS2 was because all we had to do to watch DVDs was buy the movies themselves, we didn't have to splash out a further £500 on an HDTV or £5,000 on a 1080p one! How many people that already own HDTVs will actually be able to watch Blu-Ray movies in their full 1080p glory for example?

  • myrmican #56 6 years ago

    Not true. You can watch them on any TV you like, but obviously you'll only fully see the resolution benefit on a HD screen.

    Not sure that's true. If the authors make the menu and interface graphics to take advantage of the increased resolution, the rest of us normal folk will see a blurry mess where the HD converts will see nice crisp readable text.

    It's that, or the HD folk will complain that people are making all the fonts bigger than necessary - I wonder which audience they'll make the discs for?

  • Darren #57 6 years ago

    "Not true. You can watch them on any TV you like, but obviously you'll only fully see the resolution benefit on a HD screen."

    Well no-one is going to buy a Blu-Ray player and the expensive movies if they own an ordinary TV are they, they'd be better off buying the cheaper DVDs? That's the point I was trying to make that in order to appreciate the benefits of Blu-Ray movies you MUST own an HDTV and a 1080p one at that...

  • Markusdragon #58 6 years ago

    Whats the point of watching films that were never made for HD in HD?

  • tengu #59 6 years ago

    "Looking at current consumer trends, it's painfully obvious that quality is not a selling point: MP3 with low bitrate rules over CD/SACD, PS2 rules over Xbox, etc"

    PS2 has a far better games library supporting it than the Xbox ever did. Plus PS2 games get cheaper a lot faster than Xbox games do. Add to this the fact that supermarkets like Tesco charge more for Xbox games and I really don't see what it is that makes Xbox a better option.

    You spewing your incessant fanboyism in every thread is so tiresome it's unreal.

  • CrumpledPaper #60 6 years ago

    "Not sure that's true. If the authors make the menu and interface graphics to take advantage of the increased resolution, the rest of us normal folk will see a blurry mess where the HD converts will see nice crisp readable text.

    It's that, or the HD folk will complain that people are making all the fonts bigger than necessary - I wonder which audience they'll make the discs for?"

    You can make for both. It'd be trivial to check what resolution you were outputting at and use graphics appropriately.

    ""Not true. You can watch them on any TV you like, but obviously you'll only fully see the resolution benefit on a HD screen."

    Well no-one is going to buy a Blu-Ray player and the expensive movies if they own an ordinary TV are they, they'd be better off buying the cheaper DVDs? That's the point I was trying to make that in order to appreciate the benefits of Blu-Ray movies you MUST own an HDTV and a 1080p one at that... "

    Now that's a massive leap to make. On a 720p screen these movies will look a lot better than any DVD.

    It is true that most people taking home PS3s, initially at least, will be playing on SDTVs. I appreciate they would not see the *full* benefit of the movies on their SDTVs. However, what happens if the premium on Blu-ray is small, and in 12 or 18 months there is none? Do those people still buy new movies on DVD, or on Blu-ray? It would seem to me to make more sense to get the Blu-ray version in such circumstances, as they still enjoy them now, and can build a collection in anticipation of a HDTV purchase.

    I'll wait for comparisons between Blu-ray on a SDTV versus DVD on a SDTV to jump to conclusions. But resolution aside, other benefits may be compelling (like picking up a season of a TV show on one disc, perhaps etc.).

    I think the biggest argument to be made about this is if HD content was not launched now, it would take even LONGER for the mainstream to catch up. The industry is certainly ready, as the DVD market shows signs of maturing (and it certainly matured a lot quicker than VHS did) and growth starts levelling off.

    "Whats the point of watching films that were never made for HD in HD?"

    Most movies are recorded on film. An analog medium (a continuous signal, "infinite" resolution, if you like). Don't confuse that with resolution, something that's of the digital domain. The masters of most movies - on film - are far higher quality than anything you see on a DVD or the like. DVDs take digital transfers of those masters, at typically much lower qulity. Higher resolution - 1080p - will get you closer to the original master quality.

    I'll say this much - if you have qualms about HD movies and how technically ready your setup is etc. you may want to think twice generally about the next-gen systems, as a lot of their graphical advances rely on resolution. If you're a gamer, you really ought to be looking into a HDTV now, and there's plenty coming down the pipe to justify the purchase.
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 16:18

  • tengu #61 6 years ago

    "I meant in terms of display quality."

    Where do CDs come into display quality? It read like you were making a general point about quality.

  • tonynibbles #62 6 years ago

    *hugs SACD player and speakers*

  • del_86 #63 6 years ago

    I would like to make a small point about pricing (if you bear with me)

    I have recently purchased a 26" Samsung HDTV and the playback with my DVD player is superb ( in my humble non expert opinion)

    However, as a consumer i dont even tend to purchase DVD's unless they are in the sale (£15 - £25 for a film i will watch maybe 2/3 times i feel is excessive), or a film i love, which is why i am happy to pay £3/£4 to rent them.

    Now historically any new technlogy is usually premium priced, so will consumers be prepared to pay even more for Blue Ray/HDDVD's??
    After all DVD's are already priced much higher than their VCR equivalents, even though they are cheaper to produce.

  • BartonFink #64 6 years ago

    LeDilettante: "Looking at current consumer trends, it's painfully obvious that quality is not a selling point: MP3 with low bitrate rules over CD/SACD, PS2 rules over Xbox, etc"

    Tengu: PS2 has a far better games library supporting it than the Xbox ever did. Plus PS2 games get cheaper a lot faster than Xbox games do. Add to this the fact that supermarkets like Tesco charge more for Xbox games and I really don't see what it is that makes Xbox a better option.

    You spewing your incessant fanboyism in every thread is so tiresome it's unreal.
    And that's any different to your incessant Sony fanboyism how?

    I agree the PS2 has a far bigger games library supporting it but as we all know bigger ain't better. The crap to quality ratio is off the scale on the PS2 when you compare it to say the Cube and less so Xbox it has it's fair share of tat too.
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 17:04

  • myrmican #65 6 years ago

    You can make for both. It'd be trivial to check what resolution you were outputting at and use graphics appropriately.

    Trivial? ;-) ;-) You go tell software developers that it's trivial to support two different resolutions on top of all the required language variants, regions etc. etc.

    I think you'll find that they'll look for a standard that suits both, and support that. I also happen to think that that standard will be 'normal' resolution, so as not to piss off the 75% of their customers who'll be putting it through a normal TV ;-)

  • Scimarad #66 6 years ago

    "The crap to quality ratio is off the scale on the PS2 when you compare it to say the Cube and less so Xbox it has it's fair share of tat too."

    Which would be a big issue if I was forced by law to buy everything that came out on the PS2. Seriously that is such a crap argument...

  • Bates #67 6 years ago

    "And that's any different to your incessant Sony fanboyism how?"

    lol at you of all people lecturing anyone on being a fanboy.

  • RustyBullet #68 6 years ago

    "You spewing your incessant fanboyism in every thread is so tiresome it's unreal. "

    LoL you have got to be kidding me, with a comment like that you must be a fanboy.
    Besides Why the fuk would i want to buy a girlstation 3 just to play new dvds ? for that i would if i did, just buy a new dvd player. and as for UMD that is just a waste of money, buying stupid little disks to watch a dvd on a tiny little screen. Sod that i will stick to my Cinema sound on my nice big Plasma.

  • BartonFink #69 6 years ago

    @Bates/tengu
    And just what is that supposed to mean?

    Gimmie examples master Bates or is it tengu?

    Take the piss out of Sony and you are automatically a fanboy, riiiiight.
    Back to your funny little world
    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 20:17

  • wired009 #70 6 years ago

    I predict Blu-Ray will be a hit. The situation is win - win. Higher resolution means the movies will look better (If you don't have HDTV yet, you will.), larger storage means TV series fit on fewer disks (Not to mention potentially more game content.), and if you don't want to pay extra for the newer format all you have to do is rent the movie. You don't have to replace your library of old DVD's either. Just buy Blu-Ray for newer titles when they're released. Bottom line is if you plan on getting a PS3, Blu-Ray will be a bonus when it comes to movies. Buying Blu-Ray movies is optional, so what's to complain?

  • BartonFink #71 6 years ago

    I certainly hope it is a hit and we don't get dragged into a protracted format war ala VHS and Betamax again.

    It's by far the technically superior format.

    However my biggest concern is cost, specially when it comes to including it in the PS3 will it push the cost that little bit too high. Then there is the additional manufacturing costs for the discs who will absorb this cost Sony or the customer, can you guess who?. Who knows.

  • captain-future #72 6 years ago

    I own almost all good titles from the list (IMHO) as DVDs.

    The best reason to buy Blu-Ray: Robocop, hmmmmm?! yes!

  • Royal Fool #73 6 years ago

    I'm personally on the side of HD-DVD.

  • jienn #74 6 years ago

    Distance between sofa and screen aside, i think we can sum up

    Too soon - NO, Cameras have been capturing video in 1080p for many years, like Star Wars II - Empire strikes back if i remember correctly...

    Massmarket - no, not this year, or next.

    Videophiles wet dream - yes. If you can afford a decent screen, player and a £1000 HDMI cable. My guess is that PS3 will NOT be a high-end blu-ray player.


    Edited by 1 at 04/01/06 @ 22:58

  • IronGiant #75 6 years ago

    Well.. folks said UMD would never take off and that's doing quite nicely. Blu Ray and HD-DVD are too soon as far as i'm concerned but i can happily wait to see how things pan out, having seen what the 360 has to offer so far i'll also wait till the Revolution and PS3 are out before choosing my next console.

  • admir #76 6 years ago

    i have seen the HD MGS4 trailer on my HDTV and man it looks good.

  • yagisencho #77 6 years ago

    Hm. I like a couple of those films, but nothing there that would prompt the purchase of a new player. I do like the fact that there are fewer regions to contend with. I just wish they'd do away with them altogether.

  • Frogger #78 6 years ago

    jienn, seriously, The Empire Strikes Back has been shot in the early 80's, what does it have to do with 1080p ? At that time we were playing on Apple II, getting excited about buying our very first VCR and dreaming on the not-released-yet audio CD "perfect" sound...

  • azurelas_2 #79 6 years ago

    I'm not really a tech freak, but how do you fill up 50GB of disc space? Even the movies on my pc which have a resolution of 1080p are about 20GB each. How do they possibly expect to fill up 50GB (and in the future, triple layer BR?)

  • Frogger #80 6 years ago

    Live from the CES 2006 :

    First Blue-Ray player by Pioneer : $1800
    First HD-DVD player by Toshiba : $499

    I wonder... How can Sony propose a ultra-powerful next-gen game console with a built-in BR player for let's say $500 ? And at the same time Pioneer delivering a naked BR player, without the costly gaming part, for $1800 ? I know that game consoles are sold underpriced, but I wasn't expecting such a HUGE difference !

    Can we expect the same quality from the built-in PS3 BR player and the Pioneer one ?
    And what could justify the price difference between these BR player and the HD-DVD player ?

  • PearOfAnguish #81 6 years ago

    Can we expect the same quality from the built-in PS3 BR player and the Pioneer one ?

    Probably not. But to be fair, anyone who'll notice the difference is likely to have bought or be planning to buy a standalone blu-ray player.
    Though didn't early PS2s have horrible DVD playback?

    And what could justify the price difference between these BR player and the HD-DVD player ?

    HD-DVD is an extension of the existing DVD format, the discs and hardware are cheaper. I don't get why everyone is declaring blu-ray to be the winner so early when Sony has a long list of failed attempts at new media formats, they are really setting themselves up for another beta max debacle.

  • Kafeen #82 6 years ago

    "Like DVDs, Blu-Ray discs will be region encoded, but using a different system. There will only be three regions for the format: Region 1 (the Americas and East Asia, excluding China but including Japan), Region 2 (Europe and Africa) and Region 3 (Russia, China and Others)."

    So Europe still gets films 6 month later than everywhere else. But hey, we'll be on par with Africa, I bet they snap up Bluray for all their HD-TVs.


    "Besides Why the fuk would i want to buy a girlstation 3 just to play new dvds ? for that i would if i did, just buy a new dvd player. and as for UMD that is just a waste of money, buying stupid little disks to watch a dvd on a tiny little screen. Sod that i will stick to my Cinema sound on my nice big Plasma."

    You seem to be missing the whole point of the PSP being portable. It isn't meant to replace your home system, its an addition to it so you can watch films on the train, plane, or in the car (if you're not driving), or take it on holiday with you, etc. Not for when you're sitting at home on the sofa.
    Lets just hope they bring out region free players that can play anything.
    Edited by 1 at 05/01/06 @ 10:10

  • Darren #83 6 years ago

    @CrumpledPaper - You made some good points in your post but surely the deciding factor in whether PS3 owners buy Blu-Ray movies or normal DVDs is the price? And how much are Blu-Ray movies going to cost. A typical DVD costs between £15-£25 RRP depending on whether it's a single or double-discer and I reckon HD-DVD/Blu-Ray movies won't sell for less than £30-£40. Now DVD is popular because it's cheap and people can buy pirate movies for a few quid or copy them off their friends for next to nothing but how many PS3 owners will be prepared to pay over £30 for a movie?

    I think the price of the discs and the fact you need an HDTV to appreciate them will mean that HD media will be very slow to catch on, a lot slower than DVD. Most people I know have only just started buying DVDs in the last few years and now there's two new formats on the way to confuse consumers. Sure you can play DVDs on a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player but you still have to buy the expensive player in the first place and you still need an HDTV to watch them on.

  • Darren #84 6 years ago

    @PearOfAnguish & Frogger - Interesting...

    Looking at the price of the dedicated players, it's kind of easier to accept that HD-DVD will dominate the HD movie market, isn't it? After all $499 is a lot more affordable for a player than $1,899 and presumably the cost of the discs will be relative, i.e. Blu-Ray will cost more than HD-DVD?

    Wasn't Betamax the superior format as Blu-Ray is (in terms of storage anyway) yet the cheaper VHS dominated the market? I can see the same thing happening with the HD media as people buy the cheaper players because let's face it the picture quality isn't going to be any different between the two so why would you pay more for the same quality? Would it really matter that HD-DVD movies come on two discs, one for the movie and one for the extras instead of a single disc like the large Blu-Ray ones? I don't think most people would be bothered so long as they aren't paying more...

  • Darren #85 6 years ago

    Why would anyone buy an external HD-DVD drive for the 360 to watch movies on when you can buy a better, dedicated HD-DVD player for a little more? It's not like the Xbox 360 needs HD-DVD to play games as it doesn't benefit them in any way at all. I think it's a bad decision by Microsoft personally and I can see this expensive add-on selling as well as previous expensive console add-ons, i.e. not very well at all!
    Edited by 1 at 05/01/06 @ 10:55

  • Frogger #86 6 years ago

    Furthermore, it's easy to imagine that HD movies could be sold on standard 9GB DVDs as well, you just need to add a MPEG4 hardware decoder in the player (all $50 DivX players already have it) and the right HD connectors. It's even cheaper for the same result on the screen. I wouldn't be surprised to see regular DVD/DivX players with HD compatibility for less than 100$ very soon. Even if the only HD movies you will be able to play on these will be pirated ones. It was enough for the DivX format to be successful.

    MPEG4 encoded HD movies will have all the required space needed on HD-DVDs, even for long movies and bonus.

    But I'm really curious to know how many dollars Sony will loose for each PS3 sold now that we know the price of a simple BR player.
    An incredibly powerful gaming machine with the latest Cell and Nvidia GPU technologies, built-in wireless internet connectivity and a BR player for less than 500$ ?

    Microsoft is already loosing a lot on the 360 system which is far less expensive to produce...

    In the end, the quality and quantity of games (for the gaming part) and the number of movies released (for the cinema part) will surely decide the winner in this competition, but will Sony be able to pay the price ?

  • Darren #87 6 years ago

    I was under the impression that Sony's Blu-Ray format was a way for them to recuperate the losses they're making on all their other electrical products except for their games consoles? They've already laid off a lot of their staff and they're still continuing to make losses so how can they afford to sell the PS3 at such a massive loss...? Sounds to me like they're more interested in selling the PS3 as a cheap Blu-Ray player to launch their new media than as a games console...

  • PearOfAnguish #88 6 years ago

    @Darren

    Precisely. You only need to look at previous examples, like Beta, to see where Sony is headed with blu-ray. Beta was better than VHS, but VHS was cheaper. Minidiscs were smaller than CDs with the same (or better?) audio quality yet were outsold by the cheaper format (even cassettes were more popular at the time). DVD only really took off when movies dropped to £20 or less and the players started to fall below £100.

    I'm not saying blu-ray will fail, but you've got to look at the history of these things and wonder what exactly they're planning to do differently.

    Sounds to me like they're more interested in selling the PS3 as a cheap Blu-Ray player to launch their new media than as a games console...

    That's pretty much what they seem to be banking on, yeah. Since the 360 was released way before the PS3 they need to have some kind of unique angle. Hopefully they won't forget that it's also a games console.

    Microsoft's HD expansion is a risky venture, if they get the price right they could be onto a winner, but external expansions for consoles have a terrible track record.

  • Menaged #89 6 years ago

    There's something you miss.
    Altought up until now the cheaper format has won the war, this time it's diffrent.
    Why? beacuse when people will buy a PS3 (and they will buy), they'll also buy a Blu-Ray drive, so they won't need to spend their money on a HD-DVD player.
    So if you have a PS3, you are most likely to buy Blu-Ray movies.

    (sorry for any grammer mistakes)
    Edited by 1 at 05/01/06 @ 13:46

  • tiddles #90 6 years ago

    One thing that's certain is that you now cannot launch a new video format unless you have Resident Evil: Apocalyse and xXx available for it on day one.

  • Rambaldi #91 6 years ago

    So, like, these are the DVDs that you can now pick up in Morrisons for £5.99...no thanks Mr.Sony I'd like to pay £17.99 PLEASE!!!